Risks of educational space digitalization as digital demarcators of modern university corporate environment

The article deals with the problem of replication of educational space digitalization risks in modern higher education institutions by representatives of university subcorporations. It has been presented that modern higher education institution is gradually turning into a quasi-corporation, in which employees and students have a specific corporate consciousness. The article is based on the idea that digital risks arising in the process of educational space digitalization in ­modern higher education institutions act as attitude demarcators to the ongoing transformations on the part of university subcorporations representatives, the main of which are administrative staff, professors, researchers, and students. The results of the author’s sociological research conducted in the period from 2019 to 2022, expert surveys and focus group interviews have been used, in the course of which valid and representative data had been obtained. Depending on perception of the education system digitalization strategy, representatives of higher education subcorporations have been conditionally divided into four groups: “consistent supporters”, “moderate pragmatists”, “skeptics”, and “undecided”. Each of them, except for the last one, has been characterized by specific risk dispositions (risk-dispositions). The definition of risk dispositions is conditional: “risk progressors”, “risk managers”, “risk oppositionists”. The article defines the demarcators regulating the dispositions of university subcorporations representatives.

1. Alekseeva D.A., Alekseeva I.Yu. Teacher in the context of digitalization of education. Vedomosti prikladnoi etiki. 2021;57:83–92. (In Russian).

2. Batrakova I.S., Glubokova E.N., Pisareva S.A., Tryapitsyna A.P. Changes in University Teacher’s Pedagogical Activity in the Context of Digitalization of Education. Higher education in Russia. 2021;8-9(30):9–19. https://doi.org/10.31992/0869-3617-2021-30-8-9-9-19 (In Russian).

3. Dutko Yu.A., Belovol E.V. Features of formation thinking in the digital environment (comparative analysis of generations). Scientific result. Pedagogy and psychology of Education. 2020;1(6):78–92. https://doi.org/10.18413/2313-8971-2020-6-1-0-7 (In Russian).

4. Firsova S.V., Danilina O.M., Dashkov A.A., Pokazanyev V.Yu. Culture as an attribute of digital transformation. Digital Sociology. 2021;1(4):4–11. https://doi.org/10.26425/2658-347X-2021-4-1-4-11 (In Russian).

5. Masalova Yu.A. Digital competence of Russian university teachers. University management: Practice and analysis. 2021;3(25):33–44. https://doi. org/10.15826/umpa.2021.03.025 (In Russian).

6. Meshcheryakova N.N., Vasilenko L.A. Book review: Kravchenko S.A. “Sociology of Digitalization: university textbook”. Digital Sociology. 2021;4(4):109–113. https://doi.org/10.26425/2658-347X-2021-4-4-109-113 (In Russian).

7. Meshcheryakova N.N., Vasilenko L.A. Sociology of digital society. Tomsk: Tomsk Polytechnic University Publ. House; 2021. 226 p. (In Russian).

8. Pazukhina S.V. Types of adaptation of students to conditions of learning in a digital environment. Humanities. 2020;4(52):41–47. (In Russian).

9. Tikhonov A.V., Bogdanov V.S. From “Clever Regulation” to “Clever Management”: Social Problem of Digitalization of Feedbacks. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya. 2020;1:74–81. https://doi.org/10.31857/S013216250008325-0 (In Russian).

10. Zotov V.V., Aseeva I.A., Budanov V.G., Belkina V.A. Converting the sociotechnical convergence hazards into the risks of digitalization. Digital Sociology. 2022;2(5):4–20. https://doi.org/10.26425/2658-347X-2022-5-2-4-20 (In Russian).